DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus BATTI & ORS

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus BATTI & ORS

The High Court erred in holding the acquisition had lapsed; applying the Constitution Bench decision in Indore Development Authority, possession had been taken and therefore Section 24(2) does not operate to lapse the acquisition despite non-payment of compensation; accordingly the appeals are allowed and the writ petition is dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Delhi Development Authority; Appellant: Government of NCT of Delhi; Respondent: Batti & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / On Appeal From Order Dated 30.11.2017 of the High Court of Delhi in WPC No.12135/2015
Outcome
Appeals allowed
Legal Topics
Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Lapse of Acquisition, Possession Versus Payment, Precedent Overruled (pune Municipal Corporation Overruled by Indore Development Authority)
Land Acquisition Statutory Interpretation Administrative Law Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Lapse of Acquisition Possession Versus Payment Precedent Overruled (pune Municipal Corporation Overruled by Indore Development Authority)

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Delhi Development Authority

Appellant

Government of NCT of Delhi

Appellant

Batti & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / On Appeal From Order Dated 30.11.2017 of the High Court of Delhi in WPC No.12135/2015

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether acquisition lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act when compensation was not paid but possession had been taken
  2. 2 Whether the High Court correctly applied Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. v. Harakchand Misrimal Solanki & Ors. given subsequent Constitution Bench decision in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal & Ors.
  3. 3 Whether the conditions for deemed lapse under Section 24(2) as interpreted in Indore Development Authority are satisfied

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in holding the acquisition had lapsed; applying the Constitution Bench decision in Indore Development Authority, possession had been taken and therefore Section 24(2) does not operate to lapse the acquisition despite non-payment of compensation; accordingly the appeals are allowed and the writ petition is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed

Orders

  • Impugned order of the High Court dated 30.11.2017 is set aside
  • Writ petition filed by the respondents in the High Court is dismissed